Planning application · Lambeth
26/01140/G24.
Roof Top 296 - 298 Brixton Road London
Prior Approval at Roof Top 296 - 298 Brixton Road London, received 10 Apr 2026 — refused on 4 Jun 2026 (delegated, Camilla Bebb).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationLambeth profile →
Refused
Outcome
4 Jun 2026
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Lambeth planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Application for Prior Approval for the replacement of 3No. existing antennas with 3No. upgraded antennas located on the rooftop, the installation of 1No. GPS and ancillary development thereto.
Reference
26/01140/G24
Type
GPDO - prior approval Telecoms
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Ward
Council
Received
10 Apr 2026
Target date
4 Jun 2026
Decision date
4 Jun 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/01140/G24
Type
GPDO - prior approval Telecoms
Show all 14 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Ward
Council
Received
10 Apr 2026
Target date
4 Jun 2026
Decision date
4 Jun 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Lambeth portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 4 Jun 2026, delegated decision by Camilla Bebb — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
10 Apr 2026
Application received
4 Jun 2026
Statutory target date
4 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Camilla Bebb
10 Apr 2026
Application received
4 Jun 2026
Statutory target date
4 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Camilla Bebb
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
By reason of its siting and appearance, including the introduction of additional, bulkier rooftop equipment at
prominent roof level locations and its placement towards the extremities of the building, the proposed development would
exacerbate the existing visual clutter and increase the prominence and perceived massing of telecommunications
infrastructure. The cumulative impact of the equipment, when viewed from Brixton Road, Thornton Street and surrounding
public vantage points, would appear incongruous and harmful to the host building and the wider 19th century townscape.
Insufficient information, including the absence of comprehensive elevation drawings for the Brixton Road frontage, has
been submitted to fully demonstrate the visual impact of the proposal or that it would preserve the character and
appearance of the building and the setting of the Conservation Area. Furthermore, the proposal fails to adequately
rationalise existing equipment or provide robust screening to mitigate visual harm. The development would therefore result
in less than substantial harm to the significance of the Conservation Area, which is not outweighed by the limited public
benefits of the proposal. The proposal fails to satisfy the requirements of Schedule 2, Part 16, Class A, Condition A.3(4) of
the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). The prior approval
of the Local Planning Authority as to the siting and appearance of the development is therefore refused.
1
By reason of its siting and appearance, including the introduction of additional, bulkier rooftop equipment at
prominent roof level locations and its placement towards the extremities of the building, the proposed development would
exacerbate the existing visual clutter and increase the prominence and perceived massing of telecommunications
infrastructure. The cumulative impact of the equipment, when viewed from Brixton Road, Thornton Street and surrounding
public vantage points, would appear incongruous and harmful to the host building and the wider 19th century townscape.
Insufficient information, including the absence of comprehensive elevation drawings for the Brixton Road frontage, has
been submitted to fully demonstrate the visual impact of the proposal or that it would preserve the character and
appearance of the building and the setting of the Conservation Area. Furthermore, the proposal fails to adequately
rationalise existing equipment or provide robust screening to mitigate visual harm. The development would therefore result
in less than substantial harm to the significance of the Conservation Area, which is not outweighed by the limited public
benefits of the proposal. The proposal fails to satisfy the requirements of Schedule 2, Part 16, Class A, Condition A.3(4) of
the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). The prior approval
of the Local Planning Authority as to the siting and appearance of the development is therefore refused.
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.